Coventry and others v Lawrence and another
The costs regime under the Access to Justice Act 1999, including recoverable success fees and ATE insurance premiums, is compatible with Article 6 and Article 1 of the First Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights. The scheme is a rational and coherent general measure, justified by the need to widen access to justice after withdrawal of legal aid, made after wide consultation, and falls within the legislature's wide discretionary judgment. Although the regime may operate harshly in individual cases, it is not disproportionate in the round and does not breach the Convention rights of respondents.
- Parties
- Appellants: Katherine Lawrence and Raymond Shields; Respondents: David Coventry and Moto-Land UK Ltd; Intervener: Secretary of State for Justice; Intervener: Asbestos Victims Support Group Forum UK; Intervener: The General Bar Council; Intervener: The Law Society; Intervener: Association of Business Recovery Professionals; Intervener: Department of Justice Northern Ireland, Attorney-General for Northern Ireland; Intervener: Media Lawyers Association; Intervener: Association of Costs Lawyers
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 22 July 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Final Judgment, Supreme Court
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; costs regime upheld as compatible with Convention rights.
- Legal Topics
- Conditional Fee Agreements, After the Event Insurance, Costs Recovery, Proportionality, European Convention on Human Rights, Access to Justice Act 1999, Human Rights Act 1998
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Katherine Lawrence and Raymond Shields
Appellants
David Coventry and Moto-Land UK Ltd
Respondents
Secretary of State for Justice
Intervener
Asbestos Victims Support Group Forum UK
Intervener
The General Bar Council
Intervener
The Law Society
Intervener
Association of Business Recovery Professionals
Intervener
Department of Justice Northern Ireland, Attorney-General for Northern Ireland
Intervener
Media Lawyers Association
Intervener
Association of Costs Lawyers
Intervener
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Judgment, Supreme Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the costs regime under the Access to Justice Act 1999, including recoverable success fees and ATE insurance premiums, is compatible with Article 6 and Article 1 of the First Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights
- 2 Whether the regime imposes disproportionate burdens on unsuccessful respondents, amounting to a denial of justice
Ratio Decidendi
The costs regime under the Access to Justice Act 1999, including recoverable success fees and ATE insurance premiums, is compatible with Article 6 and Article 1 of the First Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights. The scheme is a rational and coherent general measure, justified by the need to widen access to justice after withdrawal of legal aid, made after wide consultation, and falls within the legislature's wide discretionary judgment. Although the regime may operate harshly in individual cases, it is not disproportionate in the round and does not breach the Convention rights of respondents.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; costs regime upheld as compatible with Convention rights.
Orders
- Respondents remain liable for success fees and ATE premiums as assessed under the regime.
- No reading down or striking out of Practice Direction 11.9; scheme remains in force.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment